Why Doesn’t Exercise Lead To Weight Loss

A client of ours just sent me this article that was in the New York Times Why Doesn’t Exercise Lead to Weight Loss

In my mind the article should have been called “Why the Wrong Type of Exercise Doesn’t Lead to Weight Loss”

The article goes on to say that research shows that few people will  actually lose weight with just exercise alone, without changing their lifestyle and eating habits. I would have to agree.

We always tell our clients at Colby Conditioning that the first rule for fat loss is nutrition. Guess what  the second rule for fat loss is? yes you guessed it nutrition. I think everyone is probably sick of me saying that “you’ll never be able to out train poor eating habits” unless of course your a genetic freak like Chris Larson and Rob Cummings

However if you really want to get great results you must adopt this type of mind set.

In regards to exercise this article really only looked at the effects of traditional steady state aerobic exercise (cardio) on fat loss and its ability to increase metabolism (afterburn).

Instead of writing an article that shows misleading research that exercise doesn’t work for weight loss. Which in my opinion basically sends a message of (why should I even bother with exercise) to a country that is already in the middle of an obesity epidemic.

The New York Times in my opinion should have wrote an article based off the effects of some of the following studies that Alwyn Cosgrove has brought to our attention:

Sedlock DA, Fissinger JA, Melby CL.

Effect of exercise intensity and duration on postexercise energy expenditure.

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1989 Dec;21 (6): 662-6

This study compared the effects of high intensity short duration exercise, low intensity short duration exercise and low intensity long duration exercise. The researchers found, not suprisingly that the magnitude and duration of afterburn was affected primarly by exercise intensity (i.e. the higher the exercise intensity – the higher and longer the afterburn).

Thorton MK, Potteiger JA.

Effects of resistance exercise bouts of different intensities but equal work on afterburn.

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002 Apr;34(4):715-22

This study compared two resistance training bouts with equal volume of work performed. The collected data indicated that for resistance exercise bouts with an equated work volume, high intensity exercise (85% of 8-RM) will produce similar exercise oxygen consumption, with a greater afterburn magnitude and volume than low-intensity exercise (45% of an 8RM).

Their own conclusion was that when work volume is held constant, high intensity resistance exercise will produce similar exercise energy expenditure, but a greater afterburn than low intensity resistance exercise. If total energy expenditure is an important consideration during exercise, then high intensity activities should be considered in the exercise prescription.

Schuenk MD, Mikat RP, McBride JM.

Effect of an acute period of resistance exercise on excess post-exercise oxygen consumption: implications for body mass management.

Eur J Appl Physiol 2002 Mar;86(5):1-7

If that’s not enough here is an email that I received from Alywn Cosgrove with a few more studies:

This group looked at the effects of circuit weight training on afterburn. The exercise routine consisted of three exercises (the bench press, the power clean and the squat), performed with 10RM loads as a circuit. The circuit was performed four times (i.e. 12 total sets) and took 31 mins.

Afterburn was elevated for 38 hours post workout (possibly longer as this was when the researchers stopped measuring). The duration and magnitude of the afterburn observed in this study indicates the importance of the role of high intensity resistance training in a fat loss program.

• A 1999 study compared a resistance training and aerobic training program with a very low-calorie liquid diet and looked at it’s effects on lean muscle and resting metabolism. Both groups lost the same amount of weight but the resistance training group lost significantly more fat and did not lose any lean muscle. Additionally, the resistance training group actually increased metabolism compared to the aerobic group which decreased metabolism.

• Another study from the same year assigned overweight subjects to three groups: Diet Only, Diet plus aerobics or Diet plus aerobics plus weight training. The Diet-only group lost 14 lbs of fat in 12 weeks but when they added in the aerobic program – that group lost only one more pound than the diet group.However the Weight Training group lost 21 lbs of fat in the same time frame.

• A 1992 paper compared 40 mins of high intensity aerobic training, a circuit-training routine and a heavy weight-training routine. The heavy weight training and circuit routines both burned more calories post workout than the aerobic routine.

• Another group of researchers compared the short term EPOC effect of two resistance training modalities: A standard weight training program using 80% of RM (3 x 6, six exercises, two minutes rest between sets) and a circuit based weight training program using 50% RM (3 x 10-12 reps, six exercises – 30s between sets). The total work volume was similar.However the circuit training group had a bigger EPOC effect. Basically – there were more calories burned with the shorter, lighter workout – probably because minute for minute the actual workload (or density) was higher in the circuit group.

• A paper from 1994 showed that resistance training resulted in a higher post workout metabolic increase than aerobic exercise.

• A study published in 2005 compared a treadmill workout and circuit weight training at the same intensity and found a higher increase in calories burned post workout with the circuit group. In other words – despite working at the exact same effort level – a circuit training model burned more calories overall than treadmill exercise.

• A 1997 study looked at two groups over 8 weeks – a strength training group and an aerobic training group (both workouts were designed to burn the exact same amount of calories Both groups followed the same diet and lost the same total amount of weight – 19.8lbs However the strength training group lost significantly more fat and maintained more muscle than the aerobic group.

• A 2003 review from Norway noted that “Little is known about the mechanisms underlying EPOC after resistance exercise.”"The relationships between the intensity and duration of resistance exercise and the magnitude and duration of EPOC have not been determined, but a more prolonged and substantial EPOC has been found after hard versus moderate resistance exercise” – basically there is a longer, bigger post-workout elevation with heavier training

• And a 2007 study from the Human Performance Center at Anderson University, on caloric burn in weight training using the same loads but different lifting tempos: This study compared explosive training and slow training both using 4 sets x 8 reps @ 60%RM.The explosive group actually burned 13% more calories during training and 7% more in the post exercise period despite using the exact same loads as the slow training group. The researchers summarized – “by using explosive contractions and moderate exercise intensity, experienced recreational exercisers can increase their energy expenditure during and after resistance exercise, and this could enhance weight-loss adaptations.”

But here’s the one thing that you don’t really find in the research - programs that need to work or the researchers don’t get paid! That’s the difference between their world and ours! All these studies are essentially observations to see what happens. None of the studies are trying to get real people to lose fat as quickly as possible, which is what we are paid to do with our clients. Compound that with the fact that we work in the real world – our clients can often only give us 2-3 hours total workout time per week – you can see that every minute counts in training.

What I can tell you is that in our facility when we combine all of the above findings into a program – there is some synergy. The whole is greater than the sum of it’s parts.